With what we're paying our legislators these days, I don't think there's ever an excuse for them to not be present for a vote, unless their colleagues are preparing a memorial resolution for them. These folks get more than $50,000 a year for their part-time work.

Yet, read our editorial here. Some lawmakers in the House weren't around when an important vote on tax reform was taken last week, but they still "voted." Actually, another House member voted their machines for them, and that just shouldn't happen. If a legislator isn't present, he or she shouldn't vote. But such shenanigans shouldn't surprise anybody, and they probably don't. What do you think? Are there circumstances where lawmakers should be able to cast a vote even if they're absent? Or should a member be present if the vote is to count?

ALSO, THE TIME is here for editorial board meetings with candidates for the June 3 Democratic and Republican primaries. The board meets with the candidates, grills them pretty hard, then decides whom to recommend to voters. Most of the races on the ballot this year are judicial races. If you have a question you'd like us to ask the candidates, leave it as a comment here or e-mail me at jkennedy@bhamnews.com. I'll make sure your question gets asked.